It's the British's fault anyways. Americans separated from Britain when Britain still used the imperial system. Once they switched to metric, news didn't make it to the US until it was too integrated to easily change.

"a much better and more logical measurement system"
that's your opinion. there's nothing illogical about the Fahrenheit scale (the long quote at the end of this explains the logic of the scale). one of the main reasons it's still in use in the US is because each degree represents a smaller change than in the centigrade scale, which is useful.

"According to a letter Fahrenheit wrote to his friend Herman Boerhaave,[10] his scale was built on the work of Ole Rømer, whom he had met earlier. In Rømer's scale, brine freezes at zero, water freezes and melts at 7.5 degrees, body temperature is 22.5, and water boils at 60 degrees. Fahrenheit multiplied each value by four in order to eliminate fractions and increase the granularity of the scale. He then re-calibrated his scale using the melting point of ice and normal human body temperature (which were at 30 and 90 degrees); he adjusted the scale so that the melting point of ice would be 32 degrees and body temperature 96 degrees, so that 64 intervals would separate the two, allowing him to mark degree lines on his instruments by simply bisecting the interval six times (since 64 is 2 to the sixth power).[9][11]"

Well, Fahrenheit is one thing, what about the rest of the system? The imperial system is not very logical and its harder to convert units in the imperial system than it is in the metric system. For example, its incredibly easy to calculate how much volume a 1 decimeter cube would have, not as easy to find out how many fluid ounces a 1 yard cube can have.

Also in terms of distance, the metric system is also a lot more logical, because its easy to convert. If you take for example 1.678 kilometers to meters, its so simply even a child can do it, however taking 1.678 miles into yards is not really that simple, even for grownups (speaking for myself and those i know).

Due to these reasons the imperial system is inconvinient and "stupid" because of the seemingly arbitrary units based on tangible real-life things, since its hard to convert units and understand just how much 2.34 fluid ounces are compared to 2.34 deciliters i would say that the metric system is a lot easier and better way of measuring.

Also concerning the fancy quote from Fahrenheit, just because he based the system upon someone elses scale and multiplied it by four, doesnt mean the system is better. The Fahrenheit to Celsius is the same as Imperial to Metric, because the celsius system has a logical 0 water freezes and 100 water boils instead of 32 water freezes and 212 water boils. The fahrenheit system will make it harder to, for example heat something up 2/3 water boiling temperature because the illogical numbers that are used.

1.) I never said anything about the imperial system. I'm speaking entirely about the Fahrenheit scale (while yes, it's part of the imperial system, I'm not speaking about the imperial system as a whole).

2.) claiming that simply because it's easier to convert makes the metric system more logical is a silly argument. also, no one really uses such specific measurements like "1.678 miles." the only people who would be making such measurements would be engineers or scientists, and they would already be using the SI system. your average layman would just say "about a mile and a half" and (if you understand the imperial system) you already know the relationship between 1.5 miles and other conversions.

kind of like claiming calculus is bad because it's hard. calculus isn't hard if you actually know what you're doing. likewise, converting measurements using the imperial system isn't hard if you know what you're doing.

3.) "seemingly arbitrary units based on tangible real-life things" so, for example:
the fact that one of the measurements for distance is called a "foot" is confusing? that makes it inconvenient and stupid? I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

4.) I never said Fahrenheit was "better." you are making that up. I said that it wasn't illogical. my statement still stands. there is nothing illogical about the Fahrenheit scale

5.) the Fahrenheit scale isn't based on the boiling and freezing points of water, therefore your argument that the centigrade scale is "better" because it is, is exactly the same as an "apples vs oranges" argument. that's like saying birds are better than gazelles because birds can fly. that's non sequitor.

just accept it. it is way easier to use the metric system. calculations can be done faster in your mind. there is no need to use the imperial system. what is the logic in 3 ft being one yard and idk how many yards in a mile?

using a foot is inconvenient when you try to figure out how many inches there are in 37 feet or how many feet in 234 yards.

what is logical about 32 being water's freezing point? celsius is easy 0 is freezing point of water and 100 is boiling. i don't think the smaller measurable change in the fahrenheit really matters.

the thing is, you don't ever need to know the exact number of inches in 37 feet, or the exact number of feet in 234 yards. you just know what those distances are, because you're familiar with the system.

personally, I do like the system of meters, kilometers, etc, because I'm an astrophysics major, but feet, inches, and miles are more familiar to me. for ME, the imperial system is easier, because I understand it.

"what is logical about 32 being water's freezing point?" like I said before, the Fahrenheit system isn't based on the freezing point and boiling points of water.

also, the small changes are actually incredibly useful in the Fahrenheit scale. it makes weather temperature measurements easier.

0 C is cold, but not too cold. 100 C and you're dead.
0 F is cold, but you'd still alive. 100 F is hot, but you'd still be fine (where I'm from, 100 F is pretty common). Fahrenheit gives you a 100 point scale here, whereas Celsius would only give you about a 56 point range.